My horoscope was dead on!

[cydonia]

I'm not kidding! A co-worker had this huge book about birthdays, and all the signs and other astrology stuff etc. that went with the birthday. She read off the horoscope of her manager, (who drives everyone crazy) and the horoscope basically said that someone born on that day would drive everyone crazy (intentional or un).

So I flipped to mine, and sure enough it was me(mild sarcasm)! I really felt like I was reading something from beyond.

I don't believe in astrology or anything else anymore really, but still it made me wonder if there's a slight chance it's accurate.

Now rip me a new one.

[Division By Zero]

I read the horoscopes once in a while out of boredom, and they're dead wrong more often than they are kinda-right.

Consider first that no two horoscopes are the same on any given day. If horoscopes have any truth in them, it's kind of odd that the newspaper you read apparently overrides your birth sign.

Secondly, even if every newspaper everywhere made the same predictions, there are only twelve signs in the Zodiac. There are roughly 6 billion people on Earth, so if we divide them up evenly we get 500 million people for each prediction.

That means that on any given day, assuming all horoscopes are identical (which, of course, they aren't)...

1) 500 million people are about to rediscover a long-lost family member,
2) 500 million people are on the verge of great success both at home and work,
3) 500 million people suspect someone is not who they claim to be,
4) 500 million people should consider a career change, and so on.

As for having "a slight chance it's accurate," sure- with numbers like that, or even with the number of people that subscribe to a given newspaper, chances are the prediction will apply to somebody. But if horoscopes are supposed to make accurate predictions, not just random guesses, then 500 million people would be in the same unusual circumstances on the same day or week- which is a little far-fetched. Of course, there are more mundane horoscopes as well ("You will drive somebody crazy today"), which improves the odds a bit, but with something as general as that, I could pull the same prediction out of my ear without ever knowing your birth sign and be just as likely to be right.


How'd I do?

[cydonia]

I don't know, all this critical thinking sort of takes the magic away.

I used to be addicted to horoscopes, they really seem bunk to me now. But this book, it wasn't just the horoscope for the day, but the type you get that explains in general what type of person you are, your strengths, weaknesses, etc. It was very indepth. I'm sure it's crap, but it felt real.

Still, even though I haven't studied astrology fully, I can't possibly imagine any sort of evidence that could suggest the planets and stars are affecting my personal qualities and desires. But it really seemed accurate.

I basically agree with you, I just wonder if I have closed my mind completely.

[Muad'Dib]

Originally posted by cydonia
But this book, it wasn't just the horoscope for the day, but the type you get that explains in general what type of person you are, your strengths, weaknesses, etc. It was very indepth. I'm sure it's crap, but it felt real.

Here's something to try, if you're interested and kind of social.

Find a book similar to the one your coworker used, and find someone who doesn't know your birthday. Write down three (or five, or ten, etc.) dates--your birthday and however many other random dates you want--and ask your new friend to pick one of the dates from a hat and read the horoscope information for that birthdate to you. It's *possible* that it'll be the entry for your actual birthday, but you won't know for sure, and neither will (s)he. See how well the description fits you, and afterward look at the date.

If you like, you can try this double-blind experiment with several books and several people.

Alternatively, have your partner read ALL the entries for the dates in the hat, and you can try to guess which of them corresponds to your actual birthday.

My experience with horoscope books is that there are actually several different personality descriptions that match me fairly well, and very often the closest match (none of them are ever perfect) is in Scorpio or Pisces even though technically I'm a Cancer. I think any sufficiently introspective person will find familiar aspects in just about any personality description.

Another fun thing to do is read your horoscope at the end of the day and try to figure out what sign you are based on what kind of day you had. Surprisingly, I'm apparently a Cancer much less than 1/12th of the time! :D

[Godless Wonder]

I think the best* horoscopes I have seen are Rob Brezny's Free Will Astrology. And I don't believe in Free Will (seriously, I don't) or [the purported accuracy of] astrology.

http://www.freewillastrology.com/

These appear weekly in the Houston Press, and I suspect the "alternative press" publications of other cities.

*best == most creative and entertaining which I have seen, without any attempted measurement of accuracy, which I'm sure is no better than random.

[lunachick]

www.astro.com

;)

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by cydonia
.. So I flipped to mine, and sure enough it was me(mild sarcasm)! I really felt like I was reading something from beyond.

I don't believe in astrology or anything else anymore really, but still it made me wonder if there's a slight chance it's accurate.
To disbelieve in astrology is as well nonsense as to disbelieve in a language (for example French) or to disbelieve in music (for example Blues).

Astrology is an old science and art, a symbolic language which can tell about the 'signs of time' (see Jesus in NT) - it was called the Queen of science, because it needs a lot of disciplines and experience, not to learn in a few month.

I do astrology now for 40 years. I have put my experience in a software and on the web. The only superstition in relation to astrology is the superstition that astrology is superstition. No one who assert, that astrology is superstition has studied astrology. Because the authorities in Judaism about 500 BCE have seen the power which is connected with the knowledge in astrology they have done a lot of crime to hide their history that includes astrology as a spiritual science. They have exchanged for example the 12 zodiac signs into the 12 sons of Israel and have done many more 'modifications' in the scriptures to hide their true history. The astrological meaning of the planet Jupiter concerning righteous was changed to a guy called 'Melechzedek' (Hebrew: "King of righteous ") etc. This crime, the discredit of this science and astrologers holds until now because of the bias in the 'religious education' of students. Nothing, absolutely nothing is known about the science of astrology by those, who keep on this desinformation.

Best

Volker
(Karma Astrologer)

[livius drusus]

Astrology isn't a religion, really. It's more of a pseudoscience, like alchemy. I'm therefore moving this thread to S&S.

Just for the record, I have never encoutered a horoscope that was anything but a shot in the dark. The overwhelming majority of them fall so wide of the mark they make the rare hit seem remarkable.

[Shadowy Man]

Originally posted by cydonia
I don't know, all this critical thinking sort of takes the magic away.


I'm really sorry that you feel this way.

Critical thinking has provided far more magic in my life than fantasy ever could.

[Arken]

Originally posted by cydonia
I don't know, all this critical thinking sort of takes the magic away.

Then why did you post this in a forum that would have people critically thinking about your statement?

Have you checked to see how many other horoscopes in the book were accurate to you? I'm guessing quite a few would be.

[Muad'Dib]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
The only superstition in relation to astrology is the superstition that astrology is superstition.

Are you claiming that no one who makes claims that favor astrology (e.g., newspaper astrology columns) make those claims on a fallacious and superstitious basis? I.e., is all astrology right, or do you have to "do" it in a particular way?

Because the authorities in Judaism about 500 BCE have seen the power which is connected with the knowledge in astrology they have done a lot of crime to hide their history that includes astrology as a spiritual science. They have exchanged for example the 12 zodiac signs into the 12 sons of Israel and have done many more 'modifications' in the scriptures to hide their true history. The astrological meaning of the planet Jupiter concerning righteous was changed to a guy called 'Melechzedek' (Hebrew: "King of righteous ") etc.

If I'm reading you correctly, you claim that astrology is integral to Judaism and the reason this isn't clear to everyone is because the Jews covered it up. Regardless of the accuracy of this claim, do you think Jewish astrological methods are better (or equal to) historically Chinese or Indian or Arabic astrological methods? If so, why? What's the proper methodology to use?

This crime, the discredit of this science and astrologers holds until now because of the bias in the 'religious education' of students. Nothing, absolutely nothing is known about the science of astrology by those, who keep on this desinformation.

Forgive an ignorant question, but you seem to be the one to ask: what is there to know about astrology? Are all astrologers right, or are some would-be astrologers misguided? If the latter, what do you say is the correct astrology?

I apologize if you deal with this on your webpage, but unfortunately I can't read German.

[cydonia]

I was having fun with this thread, I don't believe in astrology. I like critical thinking as well. A goofy thread is good for you! ;)

I know astrology can be a "shot in the dark", I guess I was just a little surprised at how accurate I perceived this page long entry on my birthdate to be.

Sometimes I have to step back and question, "Do I believe there is another dimension/power/god thing/whatever?" The answer is no, but I also don't want to feel like I'm dismissing everything out of hand.

When I was a new ager, I would have clung to this as proof I was important somehow, I just think it's interesting how fast I automatically reject this stuff now when I would have absorbed it before.

[Arken]

I remember not too long ago seeing a TV program where a class full of students were given what they were told were their astrological charts drawn up based on their birth days. Over half of them, in my memory, said that the charts were remarkably accurate. It turned out at the end that all of the charts were exactly the same.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Muad'Dib
Are you claiming that no one who makes claims that favor astrology (e.g., newspaper astrology columns) make those claims on a fallacious and superstitious basis? I.e., is all astrology right, or do you have to "do" it in a particular way? No. The important point is, that he, who is able to interpret the astrological signs correct, can match this with a person who is born on a known time and location. That shit is made with astrology is not the point. If I'm reading you correctly, you claim that astrology is integral to Judaism and the reason this isn't clear to everyone is because the Jews covered it up. Regardless of the accuracy of this claim, do you think Jewish astrological methods are better (or equal to) historically Chinese or Indian or Arabic astrological methods? If so, why? What's the proper methodology to use? No. The time, that Jews have done astrology is gone for a long time. There is a claim in Judaism: "'Ein Mazal Le Yisrael' which means: 'Israel is not affected by the zodiac (Mazzaroth)'. But - and this is important - it is said, that if Israel will leave the spiritual laws (causality/Karma) from the zodiac, Israel will fall back under the laws of the Mazzaroth (zodiac). This means in short, that all Jews of imperfection in this world are under the law of the zodiac, only them, who are perfect (all Karma solved) are free from this causality.

In the OT there is spoken from Balaam - an astrologer - who was called to interpret the twelve zodiac signs on the sky, but this situation was modified. Numbers 24:1 "And when Balaam saw that it pleased the LORD to bless Israel, he went not, as at other times, to seek for enchantments, but he set his face toward the wilderness ('very accurate descrition'). And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel abiding [in his tents] according to their tribes .. " Why must they call an astrologer to interpretate something, for what one must lift the eyes to see a plot of four times three 'objects' aligned to the four directions of the sky? (No one believes in the historic logistic of this plot).

Job 38:31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? 32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? 33 Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

"The zodiac is first mentioned in Jewish sources in Sefer Yezirah (the earliest extant Hebrew text of systematic, speculative thought, with discussions of a distinctively mystical nature; written sometime between the 3rd and 6th centuries), where the names given to the 12 signs are direct Hebrew translations of the Latin names. A later publication, the Yalkut Shimoni (best known and most comprehensive anthology of midrashim, dating
somewhere around the 12th-13th century) associates the 12 signs of the zodiac with the 12 tribes of Israel. In a medieval Midrash on the festivals of the year (Pesikta Rabbati), a passage occurs which explains the names of the signs homiletically in accordance with Jewish history." Forgive an ignorant question, but you seem to be the one to ask: what is there to know about astrology? Are all astrologers right, or are some would-be astrologers misguided? If the latter, what do you say is the correct astrology? Correct astrology needs the study of all the thousand+ of possible different symbols by experience and own check of validity inclusive knowledge about all the correct astronomical calculations for each time and location.
It needs the knowledge of the full spectrum of human psyche (Unabomber, Charles Manson, Tourette syndrom guys, Losers, genies, musicians, dreamers, introverted sentimental, etc.). What is the plot of his chart? What is the load in this life and what are the possibilities of that character? Using Astrology one can find an answer in some minutes, while a psychologist needs some month to find the kernel point of a being. This scope includes a view to the load from prior life's and it's effects from causality together with a perspective of jobs for this life.

People do ask, 'why do I have this individual fate?' 'What is the cause?' It should be clear, that no one is born with the same social state or same state of health condition for his life. If causality is an acknowledged law, there could not be a random chaos without any order in the nature of psychological life. Astrology shows this dynamic of life for each individual, which is stamped while birth with the specific signs of time in an eternal harmony with the laws of the universe from the state of position of the earth to the planetary angle positions in the 2 Pi space and four quadrants around the location of birth.

Hope this helps.

Volker

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by lunachick
www.astro.com

;) Did they told you about your loud serious fights you had with your father?

[lunachick]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
Did they told you about your loud serious fights you had with your father?

LOL! That was a shot in the dark, Volker, and you know it. Like all early teens I shouted and cried at my parents when I wasn't allowed to go out, or get my own way, or whatever. That was way too easy. :p

Incidentally, I was born in Bad Aibling, Germany, on the 11th May 1963, at approx 12 noon. Go for it! ;) :D

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by lunachick
LOL! That was a shot in the dark, Volker, and you know it. Like all early teens I shouted and cried at my parents when I wasn't allowed to go out, or get my own way, or whatever. I spoke on 'your loud serious fights you had with your father', and you speak about ' I shouted and cried at my parents', and thats - however - a hit. Those remarks are not taken from random; they are published. I can tell you more about the relation between you and your father, your confused parent's home and about your 'hard' conversation stil in life discussions.

I think, you have missed your father as a real father, you are quick at repartee, but sometime your talking prior to thinking. You do not know fear or danger and you destroy the things, which you love. You are acting in hidden areas, you are mad about your inhibitions, you do hide your intentions, and you have problems to be soft and gentle. If you have a partner he is a problem to you. You are fixed in your mind, sometimes you are agressive and of powerful violence. You love philosophy and culture ... [some 20k byte more text snipped].

Volker

[MortalWombat]

A few years ago I saw some program on TV that had James Randi on it. Randi performed a demonstration in a classroom of college students. He announced that an astrologer had done readings on each student. He handed each student his or her particular horoscope and asked each one to read their own horoscope privately, and then asked to rate its accuracy on a scale of one to five, five being the best.

Almost all the scores were fives and the rest were fours. Then Randi asked the students to pass their horoscopes to the student behind them. After a few seconds the students realized that every horoscope was worded exactly the same.

A similar thing was done by John Stossel on Good Morning America. He had an astrologer do a chart for mass murderer Ed Kemper, passed it out to a bunch of people, and asked them to rate how acurately it reflected their own lives. Most agreed that it did. Then he revealed to them that they all got the same horoscope, and to top it all off, it was of a mass murderer. That elicited a few laughs from the participants.

[Arken]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
I spoke on 'your loud serious fights you had with your father', and you speak about ' I shouted and cried at my parents', and thats - however - a hit.


Oh please. It's only a 'hit' because most teens had 'loud, serious fights' with their father. Try something more specific... like the name of the first guy she kissed or something.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by MortalWombat
Almost all the scores were fives and the rest were fours. Then Randi asked the students to pass their horoscopes to the student behind them. After a few seconds the students realized that every horoscope was worded exactly the same.

A similar thing was done by John Stossel on Good Morning America. He had an astrologer do a chart for mass murderer Ed Kemper, passed it out to a bunch of people, and asked them to rate how acurately it reflected their own lives. Most agreed that it did. Then he revealed to them that they all got the same horoscope, and to top it all off, it was of a mass murderer. That elicited a few laughs from the participants. There are some rules in science. Who has checked the correct birth time from Ed from with a horoscope was made? I find on the IN: "KEMPER, Ed ("The Co-Ed Killer") Born in 1945 in Burbank, California, Kemper began having problems after his parents' divorce. "

or "Ed Kemper was born in December of 1948 in Burbank, California (USA). He had 2 sisters. His mother and father fought constantly; eventually they divorced. It was after the divorce that Kemper began having problems."

If I get a correct birth certificate from Ed, I can write which astrological signs are relevant for his special psyche stamp. Without this your example is of no scientific worth. It is like religiuos bias.

BTW. This example shows, that people do believe, what they would believe: The believe, that one text is scored by several readers shell disprove the hole astrology. But astrology wasn't involved in this game, except as one text sheet from which was asserted by no prove, it is a text from Ed's chart. The object of this game were stupid scoring students who score each shit paper where an empty square is. Strange skeptics here.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Arken
Oh please. It's only a 'hit' because most teens had 'loud, serious fights' with their father. Try something more specific... like the name of the first guy she kissed or something. Wait for her comment.

BTW. If some do not know, that there are some hidden functions in nature, not known by physicists, well known by the people in Sumer, Babylon, Assyria, Chaldea, (Relation between the character of planets and born beings) then he can certainly explain by known physic, why Mrs. Penny Thornton got some specific data in 1989 from an event in 1997 doormann.org/ladydi.htm. Maybe Mr. Randy or anyone can prove that this might a hoax, but I wold like to see by proof, why this is/must a hoax. LOL.

Volker

[ComestibleVenom]

Somebody else's horoscope was right on! (As a description of me)

Therefore, I was not born in august making me a Leo, but am a capricorn. Therefore my parents lied or are deluded about the date at which I was born.

[ComestibleVenom]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
BTW. If some do not know, that there are some hidden functions in nature, not known by physicists, well known by the people in Sumer, Babylon, Assyria, Chaldea, (Relation between the character of planets and born beings) then he can certainly explain by known physic, why Mrs. Penny Thornton got some specific data in 1989 from an event in 1997 doormann.org/ladydi.htm. Maybe Mr. Randy or anyone can prove that this might a hoax, but I wold like to see by proof, why this is/must a hoax. LOL.



What information was claimed to be obtained?

What independent verification of it are availible?

How many hundreds of such predictions have been made by this fellow and failed miserably?(I conjecture many, many)

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Division By Zero
I read the horoscopes once in a while out of boredom, and they're dead wrong more often than they are kinda-right.

Consider first that no two horoscopes are the same on any given day. If horoscopes have any truth in them, it's kind of odd that the newspaper you read apparently overrides your birth sign.

Secondly, even if every newspaper everywhere made the same predictions, there are only twelve signs in the Zodiac. There are roughly 6 billion people on Earth, so if we divide them up evenly we get 500 million people for each prediction. Ever heard that next to signs 7+ planets positioned in that signs play a role in astrology? Ever heard, that next to this some other thousand+ elements play a role in astrology? I have interpret about 1200 different independent elements in my software, from which some 50-70 relate to a born being. Your scientific approach on this is not better than trying to divide by zero.

Some of the effects in life can be interpret for example from the position of the planet Saturn in aspekt to other planets, moon or sun. All astrologers in the world agree on the effect of 'boundary' concerning Saturn. Saturn can shield something, but it can also limit the freedom in several areas (p.e. father). 'You are well inside, but you cannot go out', may a sentence related to Saturn.

Why do I write on this?

Well, on doormann.org/asssky.htm you can read a great article by Ahmad (IRIS) about the Astronomy in Babylon and he cites from a Babylonian boundary stone mentioned Saturn (Ninib) as the 'Lord of Boundary':

"Whenever ... any one shall arise and against that field shall raise a claim or cause a claim to be raised, shall say the field is not the gift of the king and shall order a thoughtless man, a fool, a deaf man to approach that inscribed stone and shall throw it into the water, burn it with fire, hide it in a field where it cannot be seen. May the great gods, as many as on this stone by their names are mentioned with an evil curse, that is without escape, curse him. May Anu, Enlil, and Ea in anger look upon him and destroy his life, [and] the children, his seed. May Marduk (Jupiter), the lord of constructions (?), stop up his rivers, and Zarpanitum ( ), the great mistress, spoil his plans. May Ninib (Saturn) and Gula ( ), the lords of the boundary and of this boundary stone, cause a destructive sickness to be in his body, so that, as long as he lives, he may pass dark and bright red blood as water. May Sin (Moon), the eye of heaven and earth, cause leprosy to be in his body, so that in the enclosure of his city he may not lie. May the gods, all of them, as many as are mentioned by their names, not grant him life for a single day."

Some other meanings obout Venus, which was called Astarte, Innana, Ishtar, Dilbat, Ashera, etc. and which do relate to beauty, woman, etc. are also in full agreement to the present meaning of the planet Venus in astrology and there is no disagree in the astrological meaning about Saturn some 3000 years ago and now.

The bias stamp given by religions and high school education concerning astrology is. But no one has cross checked any durty bias. Strange understanding of science.

Volker

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by ComestibleVenom
What information was claimed to be obtained? Cite from her book: "In the second dream, which I will recount in the present tense since that is how I recorded it in my diary, I am sitting in a sand dune having a picnic. Diana comes towards me, dressed in white with a black cloak around her. She sits down besides me. I feel awkward and unprepared for her sudden and unannounced arrival. She is telling me about someone who is called Peter, who has been fired because of her. Apparently he is going to France and will be undergoing plastic surgery to conceal his identity. She goes on to talk me about William, and while she does this, she holds up a large figure 3. She then begins to cry, and I comfort her, urging her not to give up on the marriage. She recovers her composure and I take up the topic of Peter, refering to him as a past relationship. "Its's not over. It's very much on, " she says. ...

... I escort her out to her car, and when I return, William is seated in the same chair. He is much older {1989 William was 7} and sporting a beard. He says to me. "They don't tell me everything, you know. For a few minutes we lost complete radio contact with them ... " As he was saying this to me, I saw an event from an aerial point of view. Two police motorcycles and a white car streaming ahead, leaving a black car on its own. Two vans approch from either side and prevent the black car from moving forward. [!] The dream ends in chaos and I hear my own voice saying, "Isn't anyone going to do anything ...?" What independent verification of it are availible? ISBN 0-671-89186-3 Pocket Book, New York, Printing January 1995.

Press article publish in the IN: " According to witnesses, Paparazzi -- the commercial photographers who constantly followed Diana -- were pursuing the car on motorcycles.

Authorities said seven photographers -- six reported to be French and one Macedonian -- were in custody, and a criminal investigation was under way. Police seized two motorcycles and a motor scooter believed used in the chase."

" Mystery of the white Fiat Uno. Probably the most intriguing eye-witness account was that of Sabine and George D. Their surnames were withheld to save them from media harassment.

In January, they gave a detailed interview to Hello magazine in which they said they saw a Fiat Uno shoot out of the tunnel moments after the crash." How many hundreds of such predictions have been made by this fellow and failed miserably?(I conjecture many, many) Irrelevant. Please start arguing with this one. We are speaking about physics - not about statistic.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by ComestibleVenom
Somebody else's horoscope was right on! (As a description of me)

Therefore, I was not born in august making me a Leo, but am a capricorn. Therefore my parents lied or are deluded about the date at which I was born. I think there is no reason to take this all in this forum for true, without any evidence from a published birth certificate as .jpg

[Jesse]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
I think there is no reason to take this all in this forum for true, without any evidence from a published birth certificate as .jpg

If you're really going to suspect people of lying about their birthday when their horoscopes don't match their personality, you could always use this site (for US residents only):

Anybirthday.com (http://anybirthday.com/search.htm)

Of course, people might not want to give their full name online.

Here's a possible experiment we could do here--people here could give you three or four different possible birthdays, one of which is their real birthday, then you could use your software to come up with personality profiles for each one, without saying which goes with which birthday. The person could pick the profile that matches best, and you could tell them which birthday that profile was for and see if it's correct. Would you be willing to try this?

[Arken]

I'll be a guinea pig for this experiment.

Here are three possible birth dates, years and times. I will assume you have not seen my birthdate in my profile before and I have since delted it.

Here are the three:

June 27, 1977 at 2:13 a.m.

October 9, 1974 at 12:49 p.m.

July 14, 1979 at 11:51 p.m.

If a third party wishes, I will be happy to provide my real name for the purposes of looking up my actual birthday at anybirthday.com.

[Rochs]

The only horoscopes I read:

http://www.theonion.com/onion3928/horoscopes_3928.html

[Bible Humper]

Come on, this is just the same material used in cold reading....



a demonstration in a classroom of college students. He announced that an astrologer had done readings on each student. He handed each student his or her particular horoscope and asked each one to read their own horoscope privately, and then asked to rate its accuracy on a scale of one to five, five being the best. Almost all the scores were fives and the rest were fours. Then Randi asked the students to pass their horoscopes to the student behind them. After a few seconds the students realized that every horoscope was worded exactly the same.

Astrology uses many of the same methods as cold reading, the "predictions" are all things that almost anyone can find true about themselves.

Who DOESN'T believe that they have, for example, "vast reserves of untapped potential"? Answer: Almost nobody.



I spoke on 'your loud serious fights you had with your father', and you speak about ' I shouted and cried at my parents', and thats - however - a hit.

It is no secret that this is part of the teenage experience in the vast majority of cases. The "rebellious stage".

This applies to me too, and to the vast majority of other readers.

I think, you have missed your father as a real father, you are quick at repartee, but sometime your talking prior to thinking.

I don't understand the first part, but the second part applies to everyone too. Who HASN'T said something that they REALLY regretted afterwards?

This applies to me too, and to the vast majority of other readers.


You do not know fear or danger and you destroy the things, which you love.

"does not know fear of danger" is a bit out there. You are saying that Lunachick is completely fearless?

Not afraid of heights? Snakes? Creepy strangers? NOTHING at all? I doubt it....

As for destroying the things you love bit, everyone does this to some degree or other, if only because they begin to take things for granted.....

This applies to me too, and to the vast majority of other readers.

You are acting in hidden areas

Who doesn't have secrets of some sort?

Everyone has SOMETHING which they can believe that this is referring to

This applies to me too, and to the vast majority of other readers.



you are mad about your inhibitions,

As is everyone else on the planet..... How great could we all be if we were not held back by our own hangups!

you do hide your intentions,

Nope! Never ever ever!

If you have a partner he is a problem to you.

Hahaha! No way man, she has one of those legendary relationships which are smooth as silk at all times.

Has anyone had a 100% problem-free relationship before?

You are fixed in your mind, sometimes you are agressive and of powerful violence.

Everyone is "fixed in their mind" to some degree. Not sure about the second bit, do you think that she is a killer or something?

You love philosophy and culture ...

Come on, can we get some traits which are RARE? There is a good reason why not....

Seriously, cold reading is KNOWN to be technique. You can buy books and learn how to do it.

Tell us something about her which is only true of 1% or less of the species.

[lunachick]

Originally posted by Bible Humper
Tell us something about her which is only true of 1% or less of the species.

Thanks, BH. :)

Yes, please, Volker. I actually have a soft spot for astrology, and studied it to some degree for a few years in my early 20's. I just kinda like that sort of thing. :)

But, for the sake of the folks here - I understand that if you really wanted to, through reviewing my chart - you could find something that really was me. I bet you could pinpoint a time - time being the operative word here - when something life altering has happened to me. It shouldn't be too hard - I've led a rather eventful life, and had some major shit happen here and there.

I'll give you an example: I immigrated to a land far from my birthplace at the age of 5. - That is quite specific, I think, and may help convince people here of any 'scientific' merit in astrology.

Should you accept that small challenge, then I wish you luck. I will be completely honest in answering true or false. :)

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Jesse
If you're really going to suspect people of lying about their birthday when their horoscopes don't match their personality, you could always use this site (for US residents only):

Anybirthday.com (http://anybirthday.com/search.htm)
Thank you Jesse. I will try to find Ed. Here's a possible experiment we could do here--people here could give you three or four different possible birthdays, one of which is their real birthday, then you could use your software to come up with personality profiles for each one, without saying which goes with which birthday. The person could pick the profile that matches best, and you could tell them which birthday that profile was for and see if it's correct. LOL. Why should I trust any person here, that the person is integer and honest? Why should a person agree on some deep lacks of his character if be stated? You read about that what bias people have, what disbelieve. Your suggested experiment lacks exact on this.

In an experiment running this time in Germany a similar experiment setup is made, but prior to the vote the persons were tested about serious consequence (honest) answers. Until now AFAIK there is a significant number of correct matches (Mr. Edgar Wunder, prior chief editor in the German Skeptik magazine, drives this experiment).

There was an evidence perceived from a woman in the OP of this thread. That's the point of interest. Not the skeptic to all evident perceptions has any meaning in science, it is the unbiased view on that, what is. And fantasies about some believes are not part of any science. Skeptics must learn and accept, that there are more than physical forces in nature, which are not to shown by proof, but by cognition. Truth in music, truth in speech, truth in communion with people and truth in the own work on science. No one can give here proofs to others.

I think the main problem in this all is that people would more determine (world, other people, cars, woman's, country, nation, future, end of lifetime, opinions, etc.) than to perceive (truth, that, what is, nature, world, woman's, etc.). And because of this people in general have problems with truth. Truth is not to match with the own biased position, from education, or cool signs of age, and absolutly not with a black hole position: 'Show me, but you will get back nothing than further skeptical questions as long as i live'. Truth is to be true.

Thank you.

Volker

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Arken
I'll be a guinea pig for this experiment.

Here are three possible birth dates, years and times. I will assume you have not seen my birthdate in my profile before and I have since delted it.

Here are the three:

June 27, 1977 at 2:13 a.m.

October 9, 1974 at 12:49 p.m.

July 14, 1979 at 11:51 p.m.

If a third party wishes, I will be happy to provide my real name for the purposes of looking up my actual birthday at anybirthday.com. Please read my post to Jesse.

[echidna]

IIRC Volker is more enthusiastic about predicting things retrospectively. Strangely enough I find that less impressive.

[Jesse]

Volker.Doorman
LOL. Why should I trust any person here, that the person is integer and honest? Why should a person agree on some deep lacks of his character if be stated? You read about that what bias people have, what disbelieve. Your suggested experiment lacks exact on this.

Even though the experiment might be worthless to you if you don't trust anyone here, it would be interesting to those of us who know in our hearts we are honest and believe we have fairly good insight into our own character. If you have a computer program to help you, I assume it's not too difficult to come up with profiles, so what's the harm in obliging us? You were willing to do it for lunachick, even though you have no guarantees she's being honest about her character either.

[echidna]

BTW Volker, suggest you get yourself a copy of ...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0940669420/103-7829172-9007861?vi=glance

You could particularly benefit from the "Be Good At It" part. At least the friends of mine who have interests in Cold Reading are honest enough to admit what it is and are not so disingenuous as to pretend it's anything else.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by lunachick
Lunachick,

I have given some specific interpreting to you from your chart. You could have replied on that honest, but you have not, - and you have not said that those interpreting were wrong.I've led a rather eventful life, and had some major shit happen here and there. Sorry, but that is not precise in the range of 1%.
Should you accept that small challenge, then I wish you luck. I will be completely honest in answering true or false. :) No, thank you. I do not accept that small challenge. BH: "Tell us something about her which is only true of 1% or less of the species."
Yes, please, Volker.
I give you a complete interpreting of your chart. It is in German language and it is readable on doormann.org/lc1.txt for the next 48 hours.

I think it is senseless to play games on this. I have no intension to prove something to anyone. I know that you have a big load as fate and maybe my text is helpful to you.

Best

Volker

[lunachick]

Volker,

I'm sorry if you feel insulted by me. It wasn't my intention to insult you.

Actually, I had to digest a little of what you said about my chart. Yes, it rang true. BH deconstructed it, and that also rang true. So confusing.

Anyway, thank you for interpreting my chart. I will lookout for it on your site, and find a translator to help me understand it.

Thanks,
Petra :)


Oh, it's there already! Thank you. :)

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Bible Humper

Volker interpret lunachick birth chart: "you do hide your intentions"

Nope! Never ever ever! Thats a personal opinion without any meaning, but no proof. Lunachick has demonstrated, that she does hide facts: "I've led a rather eventful life, and had some major shit happen here and there." No clear 'Yes' or 'No' were to read, that has broken the hide, which is related to that what I have cited from her chart.

Stop this arrogant investigations, if you have nothing but your biased mind and no knowlegde why you was born here, and were you come from. If people perceive a help for their fate and live from astrology interpretation, you can ignore this, or can give better explanations to each individual fate without any ethical and/or psychical contradictions. I assume you cannot.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by lunachick
Volker,

Actually, I had to digest a little of what you said about my chart. Yes, it rang true. BH deconstructed it, and that also rang true. So confusing.

Anyway, thank you for interpreting my chart. I will lookout for it on your site, and find a translator to help me understand it.

Thanks,
Petra :)

Oh, it's there already! Thank you. :) Hi Petra,
hope you find a translator. I had assumed, that you have learned German language from your parents, and that you could read it.

Thank you, that you show an agree in some interpretations.

I do not work as professional astrologer; I have developed the software for scientific research in astrology. But feel free to mail me for specific questions. I have taken a time of 12:00 CET for your chart, but it would changed some important interpretation, if the correct time was for example 11:30 CET. Did you have the correct birth time from the file in Bad Aibling? You can call for this by phone the relevant office is => 'Standesamt'. (p.e. Mars would change then from house 12 to house 1, and some more planets {Sun, Saturn, Neptun} would do change also to other houses).

Last, but not least. I think you are a greatful person, with a lot of forces and integrity, and I would like to give my respect and my acknowledge to you.

Best

Volker

[Arken]

Speaking of insults, I'm quite insulted with the implication that I'm a dishonest person. I take pride in my honesty. If you want to weasel out of the test, fine... but to do it by insulting my honesty is angering to say the least.

[nogods4me]

I do not work as professional astrologer; I have developed the software for scientific research in astrology.

and that research would be????? and the results have been published where? and your methodology is?

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by nogods4me
and that research would be? Scientifically based astrological research can be made if a tool is used, that delivers all time the same interpretations to a time of birth and a location of birth, and to all other times of birth and other locations of birth as well. Such a tool I have generated. If there is a competent person or a number of persons, who is, or are able to classify the character of a person correct, because of knowledge in psychology, psychotherapy, and a long experience with all kinds of character elements, and a specific knowledge about a testperson in deep clear honest communication with the testperson, this person or those persons may be also able to qualify the grad of matching of the output of such a tool. They can make statistics on their qualifying and significance calculations. Each one who has the competence, can get my tool for free, to start working. I have offered this tool since 1995, but no one has ask for it to check that tool using scientifically methods.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Jesse
... it would be interesting to those of us who know in our hearts we are honest and believe we have fairly good insight into our own character. Jesse,
you speak about believe in forum of science and skepticism regarding a character, from which you say, you have a fairly good insight. But this is personal opinion, without any scientifically worth; you must be abel to show by proof, that that, what your insight may, is verificable or fasificable, for that it is nothing as fantasy. Show me that proof, acknowledged by the science community, and - the moderators of II, and I take you serious.

Volker

P.S. If you would like to read an output of my tool using your birth data, e-mail me.

[ps418]

Volker,

I seem to remember from the last thread you participated in that you were not willing to make any clear predictions at all about the future. Nor would you explain how various qualities are attributed to celestial balls of gas and rock. This time around, are you going to make any specific predictions about the future, or explain the method whereby qualities are atributed to celestial bodies?

Volker:
All astrologers in the world agree on the effect of 'boundary' concerning Saturn. Saturn can shield something, but it can also limit the freedom in several areas (p.e. father). 'You are well inside, but you cannot go out', may a sentence related to Saturn.

Back up for a minute, if you dont mind. What does Saturn "mean," astrologically, how was this meaning determined, and how would you resolve a dispute between individuals about the astrological meaning of a celestial object?

Patrick

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by ps418
Sorry - you are on my ignore list

[ps418]

Jesse:
Here's a possible experiment we could do here--people here could give you three or four different possible birthdays, one of which is their real birthday, then you could use your software to come up with personality profiles for each one, without saying which goes with which birthday. The person could pick the profile that matches best, and you could tell them which birthday that profile was for and see if it's correct.

Volker:
LOL. Why should I trust any person here, that the person is integer and honest? Why should a person agree on some deep lacks of his character if be stated? You read about that what bias people have, what disbelieve. Your suggested experiment lacks exact on this.

Jesse:
Even though the experiment might be worthless to you if you don't trust anyone here, it would be interesting to those of us who know in our hearts we are honest and believe we have fairly good insight into our own character. If you have a computer program to help you, I assume it's not too difficult to come up with profiles, so what's the harm in obliging us? You were willing to do it for lunachick, even though you have no guarantees she's being honest about her character either.

Volker:
you speak about believe in forum of science and skepticism regarding a character, from which you say, you have a fairly good insight. But this is personal opinion, without any scientifically worth; you must be abel to show by proof, that that, what your insight may, is verificable or fasificable, for that it is nothing as fantasy. Show me that proof, acknowledged by the science community, and - the moderators of II, and I take you serious.


Short translation: "No, I refuse to take part in such an objective test." Somehow, I'm not surprised.

Patrick

[ps418]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
Sorry - you are on my ignore list

http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmilies.de/laugh.gif Smart move, Volker. Great way to avoid the unpleasant feelings associated with falsification of cherished beliefs.

Patrick

[Jesse]

Volker.Doormann
Jesse,
you speak about believe in forum of science and skepticism regarding a character, from which you say, you have a fairly good insight. But this is personal opinion, without any scientifically worth; you must be abel to show by proof, that that, what your insight may, is verificable or fasificable, for that it is nothing as fantasy. Show me that proof, acknowledged by the science community, and - the moderators of II, and I take you serious.

There is no "proof" of anything in science, but I'd just point out that virtually all scientific studies about personality (for example, studies which try to see how genes or childhood experiences influence personality) involve people evaluating whether various descriptions fit themselves or not, or their friends evaluating whether the statements describe the person. The astrological study by Edgar Wunder, which you mentioned approvingly, also involved such self-evaluations. The point is, even if people's evaluations of personality traits in themselves or others are not perfectly consistent, they should at least be slightly different than random chance, and that's all you need for these sorts of statistical studies.

Volker.Doorman:
P.S. If you would like to read an output of my tool using your birth data, e-mail me.

If I gave you three or four different birthdates, would you be willing to read the output of your program for each one, without initially telling me which was which?

[Arken]

Originally posted by Jesse
If I gave you three or four different birthdates, would you be willing to read the output of your program for each one, without initially telling me which was which?

I already offered this. (See above) He declined based on the insinuation that I am a liar.

[Jesse]

Originally posted by Arken
I already offered this. (See above) He declined based on the insinuation that I am a liar.

I know, but I wanted to know if he would feel differently if it was by email.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Jesse
Volker.Doormann
Jesse,
you speak about believe in forum of science and skepticism regarding a character, from which you say, you have a fairly good insight. But this is personal opinion, without any scientifically worth; you must be abel to show by proof, that that, what your insight may, is verificable or fasificable, for that it is nothing as fantasy. Show me that proof, acknowledged by the science community, and - the moderators of II, and I take you serious.

There is no "proof" of anything in science, … Oh yes. If the light is direct ON if you switch the light knob, it is a proof, that this is DC (Direct Current); if not it is AC~. (!)

Jesse, I think it drops to absurd. .. The point is, even if people's evaluations of personality traits in themselves or others are not perfectly consistent, they should at least be slightly different than random chance, and that's all you need for these sorts of statistical studies. I do not understand your thoughts. There must be an intelligent decision about matching. But you have no idea, who that is. You can calc significance values of 10^-150 but you did not say who that is.

Volker.Doorman:
P.S. If you would like to read an output of my tool using your birth data, e-mail me.

If I gave you three or four different birthdates, would you be willing to read the output of your program for each one, without initially telling me which was which?

I understand nothing. I can run a 1000 birthdates and can read the output for each one, without initially telling you which was which, but I don’t see any reason in that. No. Why don’t you order this outputs not from a professional astro service for example astro.com and let read it by your wife?

Jesse, I am not an object of testing. If you have doubts in astrology, make your checks on the matter, not on persons. If you are able to decide whether a report about you is correct or not, and it differs from other reports with other data from the same year it is your fun and freedom.

(?)

Volker

[ps418]

In other words, save your breath, you astrology skeptics. As before, Volker hasn't the slightest interest in testing his method or answering any of your skeptical questions.

Volker: I understand nothing.

I admire your honesty.

Patrick

[Jesse]

Jesse:
.. The point is, even if people's evaluations of personality traits in themselves or others are not perfectly consistent, they should at least be slightly different than random chance, and that's all you need for these sorts of statistical studies.

Volker.Doormann:
I do not understand your thoughts. There must be an intelligent decision about matching. But you have no idea, who that is. You can calc significance values of 10^-150 but you did not say who that is.

I don't understand your question--who what is? Are you objecting that you don't know which profile actually describes your birthday? True, but the person doing the experiment knows, and he can see if the one you picked actually matches your birthday.

Instead of profiles being based on birthdays, let's say they were based on your friend's descriptions of you. If you were given five personality descriptions, one of which was a friend's description of you, while the other five were descriptions written about other people, don't you think there's a better-than-random-chance probability you'd be able to pick out which profile was written about you, even if you weren't told in advance? If astrology actually works, why shouldn't the stars and planets be like a "friend" whose description of you is more likely to be selected by you as accurate than some other random description?

Again, Volker, you mentioned the study by Edgar Wunder, which worked exactly in this way. The astrologer would write profiles of different birthdates, and the subject would pick which profile best matched him, and then the experimenter would see if that was actually the profile that had been based on the subject's birthday. It seems to me you are simply being inconsistent if you say Wunder's study is valid evidence of astrology but then say it would be "worthless" to do exactly the same kind of study using your own software. If you think there is an important difference between Wunder's study and the kind of test I am proposing, please explain it.

Jesse:
If I gave you three or four different birthdates, would you be willing to read the output of your program for each one, without initially telling me which was which?

Volker.Doormann:
I understand nothing. I can run a 1000 birthdates and can read the output for each one, without initially telling you which was which, but I don’t see any reason in that.

Because it would remove the possibility of bias, either for or against astrology, on my part. Also because I'm asking politely, so even if you don't see the point, as long as it would not take much effort on your part to use the software to come up with profiles, it would be nice of you to honor that request. If your software doesn't output complete profiles and it would take you a while to write each one up by hand, then it's more understandable if you don't want to.

Volker.Doormann:
Why don’t you order this outputs not from a professional astro service for example astro.com and let read it by your wife?

Would it cost money to get profiles from astro.com?

Volker.Doormann:
Jesse, I am not an object of testing. If you have doubts in astrology, make your checks on the matter, not on persons.

I don't understand what you mean--the only way to "check" astrology in a scientifically meaningful way is to see how accurate it is at predicting the personalities/lives of "persons" in blind tests. That's my understanding of what the Wunder test did, for example--is your understanding different?

[Muad'Dib]

Hi Volker,

If you don't mind, I'd like to go back to an earlier reply on page 1, and ask some general questions.

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
The important point is, that he, who is able to interpret the astrological signs correct, can match this with a person who is born on a known time and location.

My question earlier was concerning the methodology of astrology: is it about who does it, or can anyone do it if they do it properly?

More specifically, how do the methods of the Jewish astrologers you mention compare to the methods of the ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, Mayans, Chinese, and Arabs, most (if not all) of whom were unaware of Kabbalistic Jewish texts like the Sefir Yetzirah you mentioned? Are they all equally good? Or are the Jewish methods somehow superior, and if so why?

What heavenly bodies are relevant to astrology in general? Is it just the 12 constellations plus the planets? Are all nine planets in the solar system relevant?

Also, to what extent does astronomy inform astrology--that is, does the discovery of new stars affect astrological readings? Would dark matter influence the way you read someone? Do black holes play a role at all? Or is it the "knowledge of the full spectrum of human psyche (Unabomber, Charles Manson, Tourette syndrom guys, Losers, genies, musicians, dreamers, introverted sentimental, etc.)" that proves to be more important than improvements in our knowledge of the heavens?

Thanks,
Muad'Dib

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Jesse

... but the person doing the experiment knows, and he can see if the one you picked actually matches your birthday.
Yes, I understand.Again, Volker, you mentioned the study by Edgar Wunder, which worked exactly in this way. Correct. The astrologer would write profiles of different birthdates, and the subject would pick which profile best matched him, and then the experimenter would see if that was actually the profile that had been based on the subject's birthday. It seems to me you are simply being inconsistent if you say Wunder's study is valid evidence of astrology but then say it would be "worthless" to do exactly the same kind of study using your own software. If you think there is an important difference between Wunder's study and the kind of test I am proposing, please explain it. Its alright. The simple thing is, I have no intention to be involved in such test.

Volker.Doormann:
I understand nothing. I can run a 1000 birthdates and can read the output for each one, without initially telling you which was which, but I don’t see any reason in that.

Because it would remove the possibility of bias, either for or against astrology, on my part. Also because I'm asking politely, so even if you don't see the point, as long as it would not take much effort on your part to use the software to come up with profiles, it would be nice of you to honor that request. If your software doesn't output complete profiles and it would take you a while to write each one up by hand, then it's more understandable if you don't want to.
In short, Jesse. I can submit to you four chart interpretations in German language from four different valid birth datas (I wish to see all birth certificates as .jpg (!) ) of real persons you know personally, of your choice. OK?
Volker.Doormann:
Why don’t you order this outputs not from a professional astro service for example astro.com and let read it by your wife?

Would it cost money to get profiles from astro.com?AFAIK not for a short profile (online). Yes for a full profile.

Volker

Sorry Volker, I accidentally edited your post when I meant to reply, but I fixed it now--Jesse

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Muad'Dib
Hi Volker,

If you don't mind, I'd like to go back to an earlier reply on page 1, and ask some general questions.

My question earlier was concerning the methodology of astrology: is it about who does it, or can anyone do it if they do it properly?

More specifically, how do the methods of the Jewish astrologers you mention compare to the methods of the ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, Mayans, Chinese, and Arabs, most (if not all) of whom were unaware of Kabbalistic Jewish texts like the Sefir Yetzirah you mentioned? Are they all equally good? Or are the Jewish methods somehow superior, and if so why?

What heavenly bodies are relevant to astrology in general? Is it just the 12 constellations plus the planets? Are all nine planets in the solar system relevant?

Also, to what extent does astronomy inform astrology--that is, does the discovery of new stars affect astrological readings? Would dark matter influence the way you read someone? Do black holes play a role at all? Or is it the "knowledge of the full spectrum of human psyche (Unabomber, Charles Manson, Tourette syndrom guys, Losers, genies, musicians, dreamers, introverted sentimental, etc.)" that proves to be more important than improvements in our knowledge of the heavens?

Thanks,
Muad'Dib Hi Muad'Dib,

that are a lot of questions. For most of them you can find answers in each textbook of astrology. But I think not for all.

Each one, who can perceive the psychic dimension in the psyche of humans, can learn to connect this dimensions with rational astronomical symbols.

It is not known to me what quality the astrology was about, the Jews or other ancient people have practice. I do know only, that they have proper knowledge of astrology regarding the planets, moon, sun its aspects, and the zodiac. I would say, that because of the intensive research in the field of astrology in the last century there was a big development in astrology next to a lot of nonsense written in colorful books. The keypoint is IMHO the grows of understanding of the sense of all that life and death, by the work of many individuals (C.G. Jung, Martin Schulman, Betty Lundsted, Steven Arroyo, and some thousand more).

BTW. To interpret the sings of time, astrology is only one, maybe the best tool, but you can interpret also coffee, bones, cards, and much more other symbols, because these symbols are in harmony with the age of time, they all exhibit the same meaning.

Relevant in astrology are to my knowledge: Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptun, Pluto, 12 astrological houses aligned to the sky directions, the presence of these planets in this houses, the 12 houses the sun is running from the spring equinox through these houses (called zodiac), the four elements Fire (Plasma), Air, Water, Earth. Three qualities as cardinal, fixed and mutable. The moon's node on the ecliptic, the presence of planets in the four quadrants (west above horizon, west below horizon, etc.) The angle aspects of planets (0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 135°, 150°, 180°). The relation of harmonic aspects to disharmonic aspects. The number of aspects. The number of aspects in a house. The position of a planet in house. Lack of aspects. And the relation of all this as a plot of no contradiction in hole, but in part. There are may some more, but this is standard and is related to about 1000+ discrete meanings describing a special mode of the human psyche.

It is not the mass of the bodies on the sky, which have any meaning. As the bodies all have a relation of 3:2 from Kepler's law between the potency of the radius and the time (no mass) it is also, that all bodies in our solar system have harmonic relations like the 3:2 frequency harmony of Pluto and Neptune, and the configuration of the planetary positions on the 2 Pi circle relating to the horizon of the birthplace is valid (time of day). You can observe this by yourself, if in August around 27th 2003, when the angles of the planets (Mars, Uranus Sun) are showing a time for earthquake, terror and similar crashes on our earth. In midnight Mars is in the south with Uranus, while some other objects are in Nadir. The new discovered planet Quaoar may be of interest, but I have no experience yet with that object running ahead of Pluto very slowly.

Hope that helps.

Volker

[Jesse]

Volker.Doormann:
Its alright. The simple thing is, I have no intention to be involved in such test.

So you admit that your previous objections about the results of such a test being meaningless were specious? Anyway, fair enough if you don't want to participate--I guess from your description below it'd take some time to translate them into english, so as I said I don't blame you for not wanting to do it if it isn't something you could just get out of the computer in a few seconds.

Volker.Doormann:
In short, Jesse. I can submit to you four chart interpretations in German language from four different valid birth datas (I wish to see all birth certificates as .jpg (!) ) of real persons you know personally, of your choice. OK?

I don't speak German so it wouldn't be very useful to me, nor could I easily get anyone's birth certificate (although my own birthday is listed on anybirthday.com). Thanks anyway though.

Jesse:
Would it cost money to get profiles from astro.com?

Volker.Doormann:
AFAIK not for a short profile (online). Yes for a full profile.

OK, if anyone still wants to do this test they can post three or four dates and I'll post the profiles in random order. BTW Volker, have you ever checked some of the profiles on astro.com to see if they're not too far off from your own interpretations?

[Lobstrosity]

I'll play along:

1) 7/19/79 @ 5:07 PM, White Plains, NY

2) 10/26/78 @ 8:22 PM, Salt Lake City, UT

3) 3/5/77 @ 2:15 AM, Kamuela, HI

4) 1/8/76 @ 4:16 PM, San Jose, CA

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Jesse
Volker.Doormann:
In short, Jesse. I can submit to you four chart interpretations in German language from four different valid birth datas (I wish to see all birth certificates as .jpg (!) ) of real persons you know personally, of your choice. OK?

I don't speak German so it wouldn't be very useful to me, nor could I easily get anyone's birth certificate (although my own birthday is listed on anybirthday.com). Thanks anyway though. I think there is a way to tanslate it to English. The certifcate is a must. I must be shure that the birth data are correct. BTW Volker, have you ever checked some of the profiles on astro.com to see if they're not too far off from your own interpretations? I have read some few. They are some different, but nevertheless excellent. The author is Liz Greene. She is an expert in Interpretation and Dr. Alois Treindl is physicist and has written the interpretation software inclusice the hole astronomical algorithm with NASA standard. I would say, that my interpretation is short, very honest (not smart) and direct, their interpretation is long and detailed in all aspects of the life of the born being. My interpretation belongs to prior lifes and its Karma and the job having one in this life as target, their intepretation belongs to the psyche of the character and how that can refined to master this life with a better knowledge of the own character. In any case there is a general interpretation of the key aspects of the individual character through the great number of specific elements in each individual chart.

Volker

[Arken]

Okay, since Volker seems to refuse to submit to the experiment, I did as he said and got my 'personal portrait' done at Astro.com. Here are the results along with my comments:

Sun in Cancer, Moon in Scorpio

You were born with the Sun in Cancer and the Moon in Scorpio. Your inner nature is more natural, sensitive, easy-going, and frank than your personality would indicate.

Bullshit. If anything, I'm far more easy-going on the outside and far more inwardly neurotic although admittedly the neurosis often comes to the surface.

You were born with the potential to live life simply, solely concerned with satisfying your pleasure-seeking impulses.

Again wrong. I don't live life simply at all and I am far from solely concerned with satisfying my pleasure-seeking impulses. In fact, I spend a lot of time trying to help others in all sorts of ways which I don't find pleasurable but necessary.

Others may view you as a very firm, self-reliant, determined, and strong personality.

That may be, but that doesn't say what I am and others may also view me as very weak, codependent, indecisive and shallow.

You are clear and abrupt, energetic, positive, and capable of carrying out projects that involve hard work and dedication.

I'm actually sometimes quite obfuscating and long-winded. I usually lack energy and I tend to be a realist. Sure I'm capable of carrying out such projects, but then who isn't? Capable doesn't mean anything.

On the same level, you are also fond of the good things of the world.

As opposed to all of those billions of people who hate good things I suppose? :rolleyes:

Your personality is irritable and you may be subject to fits of anger.

Wait a minute... at the top of this paragraph it said I was easy-going and later it said I was viewed as strong. That doesn't sound either easy-going or strong to me. What gives here?

Internally you are a very cautious person;

Yeah, I don't go jumping head-first into pools of bubbling lava so I guess that's true...

but externally the position of the Moon in Scorpio indicates sensuality. You are inclined to strong pleasures and sexual adventures.

I guess my life has sucked up to now then. ;)

You have a way of saying things that makes you appear skeptical and cynical.

Me? NEVER! (Okay, we'll call this one a hit.)

After this was an advice part which I'm skipping since it has nothing to do with predictions but on the other hand it was totally nonsensical and stupid.

You appear as a solid, secure, even slow person, fond of moving along tangible lines, disliking abstract speculation.

So I'm stupid? Fuck you, horoscope.

You are loyal and steadfast in your affections. Your overall attitude is amiable, exhibiting much patience in dealings with other people.

See last comment.

You are a sensuous person who likes to indulge in healthful but always pleasurable activities.

Actually, I'm kind of an out-of-shape guy who doesn't exercise much and eats poorly.

In spite of this, however, you have a tremendous capacity for exercising both will-power and physical strength.

Ha! Ha ha ha ha! This is a load of crapola.

A major difficulty you encounter in life is due to your inflexibility; once you have made up your mind, you are closed to all other suggestion or opinion.

Great... so not only am I stupid, I'm also inflexible. Is it going to tell me that I'm ugly next?

[More crap skipped]

You concentrate a great deal on your appearance and even if you are not especially beautiful or handsome, you have a quality of softness and friendliness, which endears you to many.


Why yes it is! Sort of anyway.

As far as my appearance, right now my hair has needed cutting for about a month, I'm wearing a dirty shirt, long pants with torn-up fake birkenstocks and I haven't shaved since last Friday. Sure I'm soft, but then most fat people are, right? :D Nice to hear that despite being stupid, ugly, inflexible and subject to fits of anger, I'm still a lovable guy.

You like to keep beauty and grace around you as much as possible.

Unlike all those people who only like ugly things around them.

You have a strong affinity with nature and prefer the quiet life of the country to the plastic constructions of city life.

I hate nature. I'm moving to L.A. and I can't wait because this town of 150,000 is too small. My wife always wants me to go camping but I never will because I hate it.

It is likely that you grew up in an atmosphere of warmth and congeniality. Now it is easy for you to project these same feelings to family and friends, and others often count on you to restore peace in difficult situations.

I guess that's basically true, at least the first part. I don't know who counts on me to restore peace but maybe someone does...

You have strong inclinations toward music, art and drama and you may wish to cultivate a form of artistic expression.

Admittedly, this is dead-on. I make my living in the arts. Still, if this is the most accurate it can get, I'm not impressed, especially since it says that I 'may wish to' and didn't know that I spend most of my time doing just that already.

You work very hard to get along with others, and you usually try to win arguments with diplomacy rather than force.

Okay, so I'm not an antisocial asshole. Thanks.

Relationships are important to you, and you often go out of your way to initiate them. It is vital that your associations remain harmonious, because quarrels and disputes affect you adversely.

Disputes affect me adverseley?! NO FREAKIN' WAY! I thought I was one of those people who liked it when everybody hated me! You mean I'm NOT?

Mars conjunct the Ascendant gives you an inexhaustible supply of energy. You are constantly in motion, but sometimes it is motion without meaning.

Nope. See tub o' lard comments from above. I spend most of my day in a chair in front of my desk and computer.

Lacking self-discipline, you take daring and unnecessary risks when challenged. You want most of all for people to recognize your superiority.

Wow. Talk about self-contradiction. It said at the beginning that I didn't take risks and that I was self-reliant and strong. Now I'm brash and weak-willed with a big ego.

The image you present hides a persistent inferiority complex.

Now I don't really think I hide that, do you? It's pretty out in the open.

You probably win your arguments by making the most noise and wearing out your opponents with unceasing harassment.

What the fuck? Did it not just say that was exactly what I didn't do?

There is a hell of a lot more to this but I'm getting tired of refuting it. All in all, it's pretty much wrong about me. Thanks for reaffirming my disbelief in astrology, Volker.

[echidna]

Dress it up in all the pseudo-science you want, but Volker is demonstrating clear examples of :

The Forer Effect (a.k.a. the P.T. Barnum effect and subjective validation)

http://www.skepdic.com/forer.html Psychologist B.R. Forer found that people tend to accept vague and general personality descriptions as uniquely applicable to themselves without realizing that the same description could be applied to just about anyone. Consider the following as if it were given to you as an evaluation of your personality.

“You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet you tend to be critical of yourself. While you have some personality weaknesses you are generally able to compensate for them. You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage. Disciplined and self-controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You also pride yourself as an independent thinker; and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. But you have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, and sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, and reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be rather unrealistic. “

Forer gave a personality test to his students, ignored their answers, and gave each student the above evaluation. He asked them to evaluate the evaluation from 0 to 5, with "5" meaning the recipient felt the evaluation was an "excellent" assessment and "4" meaning the assessment was "good." The class average evaluation was 4.26. That was in 1948. The test has been repeated hundreds of time with psychology students and the average is still around 4.2. While sceptics ridicule the notion that “it only works if you believe it works”, there is an element of truth to the statement. Both Confirmation Bias and the Forer Effect will clearly only work when the subject has been fooled into believing that the whatever method actually works.

As such, whether they are fraudulent examples of Confirmation Bias & the Forer Effect or not, is simply evidenced by the fact that neither Astrology, nor Volker's earlier claims of astrological links to earthquakes work either predictively or when examined objectively. They work subjectively simply because they rely entirely on these 2 human phenomena helped along with a healthy dose of gullibility.

Volker's complex (but meaningless) explanations simply reflect the need for Astrology to complicate itself in the Modern Era to remain plausible to a more sophisticated audience.

Confirmation Bias

http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs. For example, if one believes that during a full moon there is an increase in accidents, one will take notice when accidents occur during a full moon, but be inattentive to the moon when accidents occur during other times of the month. A tendency to do this over time unjustifiably strengthens one's belief in the relationship between the full moon and accidents. Worth noting that we are all subject to Confirmation Bias, but that the difference between Science & Pseudoscience, is that Confirmation Bias is a liability to Science, while an essential ingredient to Pseudoscience.

Cold Reading

http://www.skepdic.com/coldread.html Here's another reading:

“People close to you have been taking advantage of you. Your basic honesty has been getting in your way. Many opportunities that you have had offered to you in the past have had to be surrendered because you refuse to take advantage of others. You like to read books and articles to improve your mind. In fact, if you're not already in some sort of personal service business, you should be. You have an infinite capacity for understanding people's problems and you can sympathize with them. But you are firm when confronted with obstinacy or outright stupidity. Law enforcement would be another field you understand. Your sense of justice is quite strong. “

The last one was from astrologer Sidney Omarr. He's never even met you and yet he knows so much about you (Flim-Flam!, 61). The first one was taken by Forer from a newsstand astrology book.

The selectivity of the human mind is always at work. We pick and choose what data we will remember and what we will give significance to. In part, we do so because of what we already believe or want to believe. In part, we do so in order to make sense out of what we are experiencing. We are not manipulated simply because we are gullible or suggestible, or just because the signs and symbols of the manipulator are vague or ambiguous. Even when the signs are clear and we are skeptical, we can still be manipulated. In fact, it may even be the case that particularly bright persons are more likely to be manipulated when the language is clear and they are thinking logically. To make the connections that the manipulator wants you to make, you must be thinking logically. Volker's examples which he uses in this thread are slightly less sophisticated versions of these. He draws on broad human stereotypes with a little selectivity no doubt gleaned from reading people's posts here. Creating these truisms of human nature may seem like magic to some, but in reality they are entirely possible, simply by resorting to a little common sense assisted with a willingness to deceive.

[Jesse]

Originally posted by Lobstrosity
I'll play along:

1) 7/19/79 @ 5:07 PM, White Plains, NY

2) 10/26/78 @ 8:22 PM, Salt Lake City, UT

3) 3/5/77 @ 2:15 AM, Kamuela, HI

4) 1/8/76 @ 4:16 PM, San Jose, CA

OK, got 'em. Each is about 3 pages long, and it took a while to edit out all the astrological references from each, so I probably won't want to do this for more than one or two other people, although anyone who's interested could probably find someone else to do it for them.

Anyway, I don't want to clutter up this thread too much...do you want me to email them to you, or start a new thread for "blind astrology tests" and post them there?

[Lobstrosity]

Why don't you post them in a new thread and I will attempt to publically assess them.

[Autonemesis]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
The only superstition in relation to astrology is the superstition that astrology is superstition. No one who assert, that astrology is superstition has studied astrology.

I agree. Having studied astrology myself, and learned the art of casting a horoscope, I can tell you from my own experience that it is a con game, not a superstition. ;)

[Jesse]

Originally posted by Lobstrosity
Why don't you post them in a new thread and I will attempt to publically assess them.

OK, go to the thread Blind test of astrology (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59086) for the four profiles.

[Bible Humper]

Oh well, Volker, at least your material is much better than Astro.com's! (Judging by Arken's results)

Note the number of SPECIFIC "predictions" which all turned out wrong in Arken's "personal portrait". Your portrait of Lunachick had only 2 specifics (though they were doosies! Fearless and violent! hahaha!) so less of it could be asserted to be DEFINATELY unapplicable to her.

The manner in which you are conducting your defense of astrology speaks for itself, IMHO, so for anyone who wants the tough question answered which our friend Volker is dancing around, echidna's links should clean up any loose ends. (Thanks a lot for those, echidna! I really suck at finding GOOD sources for ANYTHING online.....)

[Bible Humper]

Actually, the book you recommended is not about "psychic" cold reading at all, Echidna.

It has something to do with acting auditions.

Not What I thought It was, August 9, 2000

Reviewer: A reader from Harrisburg, PA USA

I have carefully given this book a neutral review. I purchased this book while researching a paper on how psychics and mediums perform their art. This method is often called "cold reading." This book was recommended by Amazon when I purchased other similar books. However, this book is an instructional for actors who are going to auditions. If you are an actor, this book may be wonderful, please use your own judgement. If you are looking for a book relating to mind-reading, mentalism, Tarot, etc. this book is not for you.

[echidna]

Originally posted by Bible Humper
Actually, the book you recommended is not about "psychic" cold reading at all, Echidna.

It has something to do with acting auditions. Heh, oh yes, entirely different. ;)

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Arken
... my comments:

Bullshit.

(Okay, we'll call this one a hit.)

So I'm stupid? Fuck you, horoscope.

I guess that's basically true, at least the first part.

Admittedly, this is dead-on.

Okay, so I'm not an antisocial asshole. Thanks.

Wow.

What the fuck? That's the reason I have given up discussing with such people. Tell them a truth about them and you get bullet. Why people think, that they are able to judge on their self correctly, Jesse? They buy a religion called skeptic and they are immune to arguments then, but nevertheless fucking back. Science and Skeptic is for such guys only a weapon to preserve the inner stupidity and not to give prove about the personal integrity. Nature? Fuck. Truth? Fuck. Each soul is a part of god. But shit is shit. Long time people have spoken in religions, that there must be a 'washing procedure' to find the soul behind shit. Now you can imagine what this was meant. People have mixed up shit and god, which is the own soul, while the shit is the character. Because the soul is able to perceive the character in general, but not the character the soul, it takes as long as the soul is cleaned from the dirt covering the inner soul by this colorful thoughts and speech. Astrology is exact a tool, to be aware - as soul - about the shit - if one is able to see some light through all the shit around him.

BTW. I have Mars below the ascending house as Arken and Lunachick it has also. My software outputs this with: "You have energy, you are dominant, fury comes and passes quick, sometimes you use to execute your arms in the fight for your undertakings." Well, this is only one aspect of many. But think about.

Volker

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Autonemesis
I agree. Having studied astrology myself, and learned the art of casting a horoscope, I can tell you from my own experience that it is a con game, not a superstition. ;) Autonemesis,
if you are interested in astrology but as well in astronomy, you may take a look on doormann.tripod.com/asssky.htm about Astronomy in Babylon. There are a lot of background information and some specific hints to the astrological character of the planets, mistaken as gods until now from scholars. The worship was only the respect to the character of the planets, because of the ruler for some human emotions and feelings. As the Jews had broken the knowledge of astrology (search for 'astarte' (=Venus in the bible), they have banned the planets as false gods or idols. This anathema will hold up until now as an part of education on high schools and in these skeptic brains here. Jupiter, the Marduk in Babylon, as the astrological principle of justice is converted in the Bible to 'Melchezedek' or 'Melechzedek' which means 'king of righteous' as a 'priest'. Until now it is believed, that the people in mesoptamia/Babylon are slaves of the planets as gods, but one can find, that it was an intelligent search for the truth in the spirital aere of nature. The Sumers in 2300 BCE have said: 'Into an open mouth, a fly enters'; and this may show, that coolness is not a patent of the people of this age.

Volker

[echidna]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
The Sumers in 2300 BCE have said: 'Into an open mouth, a fly enters' Actually Australians say this quite a lot as well. But over here we mean "keep your trap shut when you're talking bullshit". You might consider it good advice !!!

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by echidna
You are on my ignore list

[Arken]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
That's the reason I have given up discussing with such people. Tell them a truth about them and you get bullet. Why people think, that they are able to judge on their self correctly, Jesse? They buy a religion called skeptic and they are immune to arguments then, but nevertheless fucking back. Science and Skeptic is for such guys only a weapon to preserve the inner stupidity and not to give prove about the personal integrity. Nature? Fuck. Truth? Fuck. Each soul is a part of god. But shit is shit. Long time people have spoken in religions, that there must be a 'washing procedure' to find the soul behind shit. Now you can imagine what this was meant. People have mixed up shit and god, which is the own soul, while the shit is the character. Because the soul is able to perceive the character in general, but not the character the soul, it takes as long as the soul is cleaned from the dirt covering the inner soul by this colorful thoughts and speech. Astrology is exact a tool, to be aware - as soul - about the shit - if one is able to see some light through all the shit around him.

BTW. I have Mars below the ascending house as Arken and Lunachick it has also. My software outputs this with: "You have energy, you are dominant, fury comes and passes quick, sometimes you use to execute your arms in the fight for your undertakings." Well, this is only one aspect of many. But think about.

Volker

So you're looking past the core of my argument, that the prediction was almost totally incorrect, and just looking at the words I use? I'm not impressed. How about addressing the issue?

Also, as I already said, I don't have energy and my fury doesn't pass quickly when I have it althought I don't get furious all that often. I'm not sure what that arms part means. I've never been in a physical fight of any sort.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Arken How about addressing the issue? If you would be taken seriously in a scientific forum then it is up to you to argue adquate. Bullshit is not a SI unit and Fucking is not a helpful dimension to evaluate truth. The difference between science and and pseudoscience is, that science distinguish beteen truth and untruth and pseudescience mixed it up and adding bias of any kind to it. Thruth does not need promotion or discredit, it needs a clean clear logic argumentation for them who listen to, to find this in their spirit and not in their emotional pelvis. The keypoint is, that your sayings and arguments are taken only for serious, if you do argue seriously. Why should I take you serious?

Volker

[Arken]

Good question. I certainly am having a hard time taking you seriously.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Arken
Good question. I certainly am having a hard time taking you seriously. Thank you for the talk, Arken.

[Arken]

Thanks for the insults.

[scombrid]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
If you would be taken seriously in a scientific forum then it is up to you to argue adquate. Bullshit is not a SI unit and Fucking is not a helpful dimension to evaluate truth. The difference between science and and pseudoscience is, that science distinguish beteen truth and untruth and pseudescience mixed it up and adding bias of any kind to it. Thruth does not need promotion or discredit, it needs a clean clear logic argumentation for them who listen to, to find this in their spirit and not in their emotional pelvis. The keypoint is, that your sayings and arguments are taken only for serious, if you do argue seriously. Why should I take you serious?

Volker

How about explaining why the horoscope for Arken contained contradictory statements. Might it be that the technique requires shutgunning where several predictions/characterizations are blindly made and the astrologer counts on the con victim only remembering the his and forgetting the misses? You only need separate contradictory statements by a few lines for the true believer to forget the wrong bits.

Arken's reply was more substantive than the bits you selected yet you only replied to the bits where arkens expressed frustration at the nonsense waded through. Why ddin't you address Arken's substantive replies? Have you no answer for legitimate criticism?

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by scombrid
How about explaining why the horoscope for Arken contained contradictory statements. Might it be that the technique requires shutgunning where several predictions/characterizations are blindly made and the astrologer counts on the con victim only remembering the his and forgetting the misses? You only need separate contradictory statements by a few lines for the true believer to forget the wrong bits.

Arken's reply was more substantive than the bits you selected yet you only replied to the bits where arkens expressed frustration at the nonsense waded through. Why ddin't you address Arken's substantive replies? Have you no answer for legitimate criticism? A human psyche is not one bit. Depending on weather, hunger, time, environment the emotions can be different, because a human being is able to be smart in general, but also aggressive in general. This is not really a contradiction in the sense of philosophy, which would be taken, to reject contradiction sayings.

If you can follow this argumentation and you can agree on it, then this is a good base for a discussion. If you do not agree on this, and you do argue, that this is a contradiction of philosophy, and you have arguments, then this is a good base for a discussion.

While a discussion is mind war in general, but a dialog is more effective finding the truth, I prefer a dialog. Nobody must discuss with me, but I must discuss also not with each one, who has a dirty speech.

A dialog needs to relate to arguments in the reply. A dialog avoids to attack the person, moreover it serve the to be discussing subject.

This are common rules and if they are hurt, if one think, that this rules are not valid discussing astrology, god or anything else, then I switch off. I hope you can agree on that.

I am not responsible for the text from astro.com, but I am willing to give help - and my critical thoughts - if I can on exact that base on dialog.

There is nothing to determine in this world, but all to recognize. A personal opinion may be adequate in listen music, but in recognizing truth of nature - and astrology is part of nature and not created by Ron Hubbard - a personal opinion is of no need.

I have no intention to work on to interfere people who are arguing as persons of authority. There are a lot of empty space in the ignore lists here.

Volker

[echidna]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
You are on my ignore list You've no idea how devastated that leaves me. Although at the same time I must thank you for breaking that rule to let me know.

I suppose it's an easier alternative to explaining why your consistently unsupported assertions aren't simply attempts at Cold Reading relying on the gullibility of believers. I mean it's not like we haven't offered you enough opportunities to demonstrate whether you're telling the truth or not ...

[enrious]

James Randi, in his book Flim Flam! points out four reasons why astrology is not science or anything other than make-believe.

1) The astrology symbols are arbitrary groupings of dots of light in the sky and given imaginative descriptions and shapes.

He reproduces a map of the night sky, with the various stars in them. He then challenges you to identify the various signs of the zodiac. He then points out how you can string together non "canon" stars to form other symbols, revealing the arbitrary nature of it. One man's scorpion is another man's Porche.

2) There's no scientific explanation for how the position of the stars can affect someone or how their position at the time of your birth could still have an effect.

This is further amplified by the fact that for most stars, where we see them in the night sky is *not* where they are today.

3) Assuming an argument were made that the stars (and planets) gravitational effect on you were the cause for such an effect, Randi points out something. If all of the planets and the sun were in perfect alignment with each other, and thus expected to exert the maximum gravitational effect on your body, do you know what it would take to counteract that effect using the Earth's gravitational effect on you?

Sit down.

Moving 12inches closer to the Earth is all that'd be required.

How much effect could the stars have on you again?

4) The arbirtrary nature is a clear indication of pseudo-science (or to put it another way, bullshit). There is no clear, consistent consensus of data for someone, using astrological methods.

By this, it's meant that if one person went to 10 seperate astrologers, the odds of the astrologers returning the same "diagnosis" does not exceed random chance.

And that's assuming they don't use equivicative/waffling language to hedge their bets.

[Autonemesis]

Originally posted by Volker.Doormann
blah blah blah... The Sumers in 2300 BCE have said: 'Into an open mouth, a fly enters'; and this may show, that coolness is not a patent of the people of this age.

Volker

Yes yes, I know all that. It's still a con game. Come on, Volker, I know how to play it from your side. Think of me as a Junior James Randi when it comes to astrology. I know exactly what I need to do to be convincing with this happy horseshit. I bet I could fool every one of your customers into believing that a chart I made up out of whole cloth applies to them.

[Shadowy Man]

Originally posted by enrious
James Randi, in his book Flim Flam! points out four reasons why astrology is not science or anything other than make-believe.


My understanding of astrology is that it is not the position of the stars that are important but the positions of the earth in its orbit and the positions of the planets relative to the earth. The stars just give a convenient backdrop to calculate these positions.

[enrious]

Yes, but even then they'd have to face the fact that the other planets do not affect us nearly as much as say...my laptop...or the table holding my laptop.

[Shadowy Man]

Originally posted by enrious
Yes, but even then they'd have to face the fact that the other planets do not affect us nearly as much as say...my laptop...or the table holding my laptop.

I don't believe in astrology, I'm an astrophysicist, but do yourself a favor and calculate the gravitational force on you by Jupiter at closest approach. I bet you'll be surprised. :)

[enrious]

Does it come close to the amount generated by the Earth?

[Jesse]

Jupiter's mass (http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/DavidEngel.shtml) = 1.9 * 10^27 kg
Jupiter's distance from earth (http://www.powersof10.com/powers/space/station_25.html) when the two are lined up: 6.3 * 10^11 meters

So, using the formula http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/gimg297.gif from Newtonian gravity (http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Gravity.html), the force between a 1-kg mass on earth and Jupiter will be G*(1.9*10^27 kg)(1 kg)/(6.3*10^11 meters)^2 = (6.672*10^-11 Newtons meters^2 kg^-2)(1.9*10^27 kg^2)/(4.0*10^23 meters^2) = 3.2*10^-7 Newtons.

In comparison, the mass of the earth (http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/SamanthaDong2.shtml) is about 6.0 * 10^24 kg, your distance from its center (http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci816253,00.html) is about 6.4 * 10^6 meters, so the force on a 1-kg mass from the earth at its surface will be about 9.8 Newtons, about three million times larger.

If you have a 2000 kg car sitting 1 meter away away, the force on a 1-kg mass from the car would be 1.3 * 10^-7 Newtons, only about 2 1/2 times less than that of Jupiter.

Because of the way the equation for gravitational force works, the ratios between these different forces would be the same regardless of whether you use a 1-kg mass or, say, the mass of your own body.

edit: corrected a mistake in the value of G and the wrong answers for the forces that resulted

[Lobstrosity]

Originally posted by Jesse
Jupiter's mass (http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/DavidEngel.shtml) = 1.9 * 10^27 kg
Jupiter's distance from earth (http://www.powersof10.com/powers/space/station_25.html) when the two are lined up: 6.3 * 10^11 meters

So, using the formula http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/gimg297.gif from Newtonian gravity (http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Gravity.html), the force between a 1-kg mass on earth and Jupiter will be G*(1.9*10^27 kg)(1 kg)/(6.3*10^11 meters)^2 = (6.672*10^-13 Newtons meters^2 kg^-2)(1.9*10^27 kg^2)/(4.0*10^23 meters^2) = 3.2*10^-9 Newtons.

In comparison, the mass of the earth (http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/SamanthaDong2.shtml) is about 6.0 * 10^24 kg, your distance from its center (http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci816253,00.html) is about 6.4 * 10^6 meters, so the force on a 1-kg mass from the earth at its surface will be about 9.8 * 10^-2 Newtons, about three million times larger.

Wait, something's wrong here. gravitational acceleration on the surface of the Earth is approximately 9.8 m/s². The force on a 1-kg mass would then be F = ma = 9.8 kg m/s² = 9.8 N. You're off by two orders of magnitude, which seems to stem from the fact that the gravitational constant G is 6.672*10^-11 N m²/kg² (not 6E-13 as you state above). You comparisons should still be valid, however, as your error should cancel out when you take the ratios. In general I find it's better to talk about gravitational acceleration as opposed to gravitational force. All masses experience the same acceleration in a gravitational field, so why complicate things by making the scenario mass-dependent?

[Jesse]

Whoops, you're right about G...I got it from here (http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GravitationalConstant.html) but I must have copied it down wrong.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by enrious
James Randi, in his book Flim Flam! points out four reasons why astrology is not science or anything other than make-believe.

1) The astrology symbols are arbitrary groupings of dots of light in the sky and given imaginative descriptions and shapes.

He reproduces a map of the night sky, with the various stars in them. He then challenges you to identify the various signs of the zodiac. He then points out how you can string together non "canon" stars to form other symbols, revealing the arbitrary nature of it. One man's scorpion is another man's Porche.Astrology has nothing to do with arbitrary groupings of dots of light in the sky and given imaginative descriptions and shapes.

It is the fantasy of Randi to argue on this nonsense.
2) There's no scientific explanation for how the position of the stars can affect someone or how their position at the time of your birth could still have an effect. An missing explanation does not prove something wrong. We do not know also why there was a Big Bang.This is further amplified by the fact that for most stars, where we see them in the night sky is *not* where they are today. Irrelevant. S. above.
3) Assuming an argument were made that the stars (and planets) gravitational effect on you were the cause for such an effect, Randi points out something. If all of the planets and the sun were in perfect alignment with each other, and thus expected to exert the maximum gravitational effect on your body, do you know what it would take to counteract that effect using the Earth's gravitational effect on you?It is Randi's Assume and fantasy dealing with gravity.4) The arbirtrary nature is a clear indication of pseudo-science (or to put it another way, bullshit). What is arbitray nature? There is no clear, consistent consensus of data for someone, using astrological methods. Negative proof. Stupid.By this, it's meant that if one person went to 10 seperate astrologers, the odds of the astrologers returning the same "diagnosis" does not exceed random chance.That may an argument against astrologers, but not against astrology.

Weak. Worshipping God Randi is also a worship.

If people are not able to do some significance calcs correct, or to argue ad hominem it it senseless to discuss with them seriosly.

[Jesse]

Randi:
If all of the planets and the sun were in perfect alignment with each other, and thus expected to exert the maximum gravitational effect on your body, do you know what it would take to counteract that effect using the Earth's gravitational effect on you?

Volker.Doormann:
It is Randi's Assume and fantasy dealing with gravity.

Physicists have long believed there are only four fundamental forces in nature--gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force, and the weak force. Any causal influence between two parts of the universe is thought to be conveyed through one or more of these forces, and all the forces we call by other names are ultimately manifestations of these basic forces (for example, the force of friction is due to electromagnetic forces between atoms). The strong and weak force are negligible except at very short range, so if the planets affect the brain in a way that's compatible with known physics, it must be through the gravitational or electromagnetic force. You say it's not gravity, but electromagnetism seems equally unlikely--I'm pretty sure that no matter what part of the electromagnetic spectrum you look at, the amount of radiation we recieve from the planets at that frequency is miniscule compared to the amount we recieve from other sources.

I suppose you could postulate a fifth, undiscovered fundamental force just to explain the results of astrology. But if you need to postulate radically new physical principles in order to explain astrology, along with radically new biological principles (like virtually the whole personality being created at the moment of first breath) that makes the theory inherently pretty implausible--some very strong evidence would be needed to get us to totally revamp existing science in such a basic way.

[enrious]

Isn't there some correlation between the likelihood of something being bullshit and the need to create new science that completely changes existing science to explain it?

Astrology has nothing to do with arbitrary groupings of dots of light in the sky and given imaginative descriptions and shapes.

Oh? Then what is it? Making fantastical drawings using a "connect the dots" kit and saying that these drawings happen to be clear dividers that tell you what you (and everyone else in the world) are like. Oh, but in order for it two work, you have to believe in it?

An missing explanation does not prove something wrong. We do not know also why there was a Big Bang.

Irrelevant. S. above.

<snicker> You saved one whole character by abbreviating "see" with "S." Though, you probably came out even because you capitalised the "S".

It's irrelevant that the heavenly bodies that are supposed to affect us aren't where you think they are?

Would you like a little argumentum ad ignoratum to go with your coffee?

What is arbitray nature?

When you have to rely on ad hoc explanations to perpetuate the bullshit.

Negative proof. Stupid.

Astrology? Finally, we agree on something. Or did you mean to call me "stupid"?


And despite you saying that the fact that virtually no astrologers can seem to agree on their readings is "weak", it does tend to clearly mark astrology as not being scientific.

I mean...real science has a certain "universal nature" to it - gravity, for example, works the same in both China and England. Scientists in both places can conduct the same experiment and be expected to come up with the same results. There's no need to come up with an ad hoc explanation of "Oh, that must be a weakness among the scientists."
As for the "rebuttal" you offered, I respectfully suggest you look into the "argument from ignorance" fallacy.

If people are not able to do some significance calcs correct, or to argue ad hominem it it senseless to discuss with them seriosly.

I suppose it would be better to be selling fairy tales to people? Makes me want to found a Church. With big, neon lights.

[Volker.Doormann]

Originally posted by Jesse
[b]Randi:
If all of the planets and the sun were in perfect alignment with each other, and thus expected to exert the maximum gravitational effect on your body, do you know what it would take to counteract that effect using the Earth's gravitational effect on you?

Volker.Doormann:
It is Randi's Assume and fantasy dealing with gravity.
[...]
Randi's Assume and fantasy dealing with the gravitational effect from the mass of the planets on the earth gravity potential.

Astrology deals with angles, times, cycles of planets, but not with gravity. As Kepler has shown, the gravity or mass of a planet is (nearly) irrrlevant to the cycles of time oscillating with the sun.

I have not said, that gravitational effects are excluded in general. I have said that it is Randi's Assume and fantasy dealing with gravity (in those his imaginations).

[Jesse]

Volker.Doormann
Randi's Assume and fantasy dealing with the gravitational effect from the mass of the planets on the earth gravity potential.

Astrology deals with angles, times, cycles of planets, but not with gravity.

It's true that astrologers are not ordinarily concerned with the question of how the planets can influence personality, they just assume that they can, and have a system which describes the relationship between planetary positions and p